Score:   1
Docket Number:   ED-TX  4:17-cr-00213
Case Name:   USA v. Bryant et al
  Press Releases:
            SHERMAN, Texas –Two Texas men have been found guilty by a jury following an investment fraud trial in the Eastern District of Texas, announced U.S. Attorney Joseph D. Brown today.

Thurman Bryant, III, 46, of Frisco, Texas and Arthur Franz Wammel, 46, of Houston, were found guilty of conspiracy to commit wire fraud today by a jury following a trial before U.S. District Judge Amos Mazzant that lasted nearly two weeks. 

According to information presented in court, the defendants devised and executed an investment fraud scheme that claimed to earn investors a guaranteed minimum 30% annual return on investment.  In addition, Bryant promised an investment that would be placed in a secure escrow account, when in fact the money was funneled to Wammel for  securities trading and other purposes. Evidence at trial showed that the defendants separately spent money on personal expenses such as home leases, home improvements, car leases, expensive jewelry, and private school tuition, and that defendant Wammel spent a large amount of money on expenses related to a Rolls-Royce, a Ferrari and a Range Rover.  Additional evidence showed that the investors contributed over $22 million to the scheme. 

Bryant and Wammel were indicted by a federal grand jury on Dec. 13, 2017.

“The trial evidence showed that the defendants’ scheme was very similar to a classic Ponzi scheme,” said U.S. Attorney Joseph D. Brown.  “Many of the victims were family and friends of one of the defendants.  This case shows the harm that can be caused by greed and false promises of safe investments.  The United States Attorney’s Office and the FBI are dedicated to the investigation and prosecution of these types of criminal fraud schemes.”

            Under federal statutes, Bryant and Wammel each face up to 20 years in federal prison at sentencing.  The maximum statutory sentence prescribed by Congress is provided here for information purposes, as the sentencing will be determined by the court based on the advisory sentencing guidelines and other statutory factors.  A sentencing hearing will be scheduled after the completion of a presentence investigation by the U.S. Probation Office.    

This case was investigated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorneys Tom Gibson, Glenn Roque-Jackson, and Anand Varadarajan. 

 

######

Docket (0 Docs):   https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1olqLKExSO-nbSBMrs-SWYIJT5xXbosQHZ6declbD8Vg
  Last Updated: 2024-04-02 03:27:06 UTC
Description: The fiscal year of the data file obtained from the AOUSC
Format: YYYY

Description: The code of the federal judicial circuit where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: The code of the federal judicial district where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: The code of the district office where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: Docket number assigned by the district to the case
Format: A7

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which cannot be modified by the court
Format: A3

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which can be modified by the court
Format: A3

Description: A sequential number indicating whether a case is an original proceeding or a reopen
Format: N5

Description: Case type associated with the current defendant record
Format: A2

Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, defendant number, and reopen sequence number
Format: A18

Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, and reopen sequence number
Format: A15

Description: The status of the defendant as assigned by the AOUSC
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the fugitive status of a defendant
Format: A1

Description: The date upon which a defendant became a fugitive
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which a fugitive defendant was taken into custody
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date when a case was first docketed in the district court
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which proceedings in a case commenced on charges pending in the district court where the defendant appeared, or the date of the defendant’s felony-waiver of indictment
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: A code used to identify the nature of the proceeding
Format: N2

Description: The date when a defendant first appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: A code indicating the event by which a defendant appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant
Format: N2

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the highest severity
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE1
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE1
Format: A3

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the second highest severity
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE2
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE2
Format: A3

Description: The FIPS code used to indicate the county or parish where an offense was committed
Format: A5

Description: The date of the last action taken on the record
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which judicial proceedings before the court concluded
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which the final sentence is recorded on the docket
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which the case was closed
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The total fine imposed at sentencing for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and a fine was imposed
Format: N8

Description: A count of defendants filed including inter-district transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants filed excluding inter-district transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of original proceedings commenced
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants filed whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated including interdistrict transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated excluding interdistrict transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of original proceedings terminated
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period including long term fugitives
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period excluding long term fugitives
Format: N1

Description: The source from which the data were loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: A10

Description: A sequential number indicating the iteration of the defendant record
Format: N2

Description: The date the record was loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: Statistical year ID label on data file obtained from the AOUSC which represents termination year
Format: YYYY

Data imported from FJC Integrated Database
F U C K I N G P E D O S R E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E